Nice video, we should not allow Fundamentalist of any religion to iompose their ideologies on the rest of us. Manipulators such as Charles McVety and George W. Bush, count on ambiguity, sneakiness and ignorance to get their way.
Imagine if the same religious wingnut pushed a bill that said - the area in science that delt with evolutionary biology should be cut from government funding because it would go against the belief of Christian tax payers philosphies about the universe.
Now would you not call that censorship of freedom of scientific reseach?
Now argue what heck is the difference what Bill C 10 is proposing to do to the industry I work in.
Yes, I know, but I was objecting to when you said that Bill C 10 was not censorship but close to it. From an Artist perspective it is censorship. Another thing to consider is a lot of private firms that fund comercial movies depend on banks for funding. If the banks are force to follow the government guidelines, banks in suite will also shut down projects they think will get shut down by the government. That is why we feel in the movie industry that this bill will be bad for movies in Canada.
Stick your god damn head out of your mom's basement and pay attention to what is already going on instead of sitting here pontificating about your "genius" new idea that is actually the very simple conclusion that everyone else around you has already reached.
You get an 'F'. But then again you're probably used to that.
Congratulations, with all those fancy credentials you laid out, you managed to BARELY GET the point that EVERYONE ELSE has already gotten.
There ALREADY are CLEAR GUIDELINES disqualifying offensive material such as pornography or depictions of real acts that are contrary to the criminal code, etc., etc.
Let me explain this to you clearly: This law is about allowing the Heritage Minister to arbitrarily disqualify films without clear guidelines or any kind of public consensus.
I full support tax-dollars for Canadian-content culture. The fact is, as close as we are to our American neighbours, there is a broadly applicable difference in worldview. Without funded media, the foreign influence over that media would be absolute. This is a necessary expense at this point. The Harper regime should not be pandering to rightwing religious lobbying. Very neocon. But then, Alberta is merely a neocon ankle-hugging banana republic.
Nice video, we should not allow Fundamentalist of any religion to iompose their ideologies on the rest of us. Manipulators such as Charles McVety and George W. Bush, count on ambiguity, sneakiness and ignorance to get their way.
aghabeypasha 1 year ago 2
Imagine if the same religious wingnut pushed a bill that said - the area in science that delt with evolutionary biology should be cut from government funding because it would go against the belief of Christian tax payers philosphies about the universe.
Now would you not call that censorship of freedom of scientific reseach?
Now argue what heck is the difference what Bill C 10 is proposing to do to the industry I work in.
Thanks
souldude81 3 years ago
I'm not arguing for C-10. What I'm pointing out is an extra couple of flaws in McVety's logic.
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
Yes, I know, but I was objecting to when you said that Bill C 10 was not censorship but close to it. From an Artist perspective it is censorship. Another thing to consider is a lot of private firms that fund comercial movies depend on banks for funding. If the banks are force to follow the government guidelines, banks in suite will also shut down projects they think will get shut down by the government. That is why we feel in the movie industry that this bill will be bad for movies in Canada.
souldude81 3 years ago
Thanks for the correction.
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago
Stick your god damn head out of your mom's basement and pay attention to what is already going on instead of sitting here pontificating about your "genius" new idea that is actually the very simple conclusion that everyone else around you has already reached.
You get an 'F'. But then again you're probably used to that.
therealadamhunt 3 years ago
@therealadamhunt This coming from a guy who just contributed nothing but insults to the discussion.
BoredomCorner 1 year ago
Congratulations, with all those fancy credentials you laid out, you managed to BARELY GET the point that EVERYONE ELSE has already gotten.
There ALREADY are CLEAR GUIDELINES disqualifying offensive material such as pornography or depictions of real acts that are contrary to the criminal code, etc., etc.
Let me explain this to you clearly: This law is about allowing the Heritage Minister to arbitrarily disqualify films without clear guidelines or any kind of public consensus.
therealadamhunt 3 years ago
@therealadamhunt I take back my other comment, this is a lot better.
BoredomCorner 1 year ago
I full support tax-dollars for Canadian-content culture. The fact is, as close as we are to our American neighbours, there is a broadly applicable difference in worldview. Without funded media, the foreign influence over that media would be absolute. This is a necessary expense at this point. The Harper regime should not be pandering to rightwing religious lobbying. Very neocon. But then, Alberta is merely a neocon ankle-hugging banana republic.
lextallonis 3 years ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
lol, good point.
aikiboy1111111 3 years ago